Case Study of Successful Matrix Stimulation of High-Water-Cut Wells in Dubai Offshore Fields
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The candidate selection criteria, job design, and improved implementation techniques are important parameters for success in remedial acidization jobs in mature fields. Effective acid diversion across heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs has always been challenging and is even more difficult when stimulating high-water-cut wells. For these types of wells, it is crucial to stimulate the oil-saturated layers rather than the watered-out layers. Bullheading conventional stimulation treatments tend to result in the aqueous-based stimulation fluid being injected into the high-water-saturated zones and away from the high-oil-saturated zones. This often results in a dramatic increase in water productivity and a minimal gain in incremental oil. Recently, several of Dubai Petroleum's offshore oil wells have been treated using 15% hydrochloric acid (HCl) and a viscoelastic-surfactant (VES)-based diverter, resulting in a significant uplift in oil production and a decrease in water cut. The VES diverter permits the oil-saturated zones to be stimulated while minimizing the stimulation impact of the water zones, despite large permeability contrasts. This VES fluid is able to maintain its viscosity when in contact with water and it breaks when in contact with oil. The increase in production with decreasing water cut showed the success of this stimulation diversion technique. This paper describes the candidate selection criteria, design, and implementation of successful carbonate matrix stimulation for high-water-cut wells in mature, water-flooded offshore fields. Introduction Matrix acid stimulation has been used for decades to increase the performance of oil, water or gas wells by removing or bypassing the near-wellbore damage, which was introduced over the course of drilling and production operations. Each stimulation job is unique and depends on the several factors that have to be taken into consideration before claiming success. Over the years, carbonate acid treatments have been designed to target stimulation of the hydrocarbon zone through the removal of near-wellbore damage and penetrating into the reservoir, creating wormholes. With mature high-water-cut fields, successful stimulation treatment involves reviewing the well history, reservoir characteristics, and potential production results before selecting the optimum stimulation treatment. In case the right stimulation treatment is not executed, there is a significant risk of increasing the water cut by stimulating the incorrect zone. Dubai Offshore Environment Dubai Petroleum operates four fields offshore Dubai, namely Fateh, South West Fateh, Falah, and Rashid fields which are in close proximity to Dubai, United Arab Emirates as shown in Fig. 1. The largest and the oldest field, Fateh, was discovered in 1966 and first produced oil in 1969. The field has been continuously developed since discovery and now includes its own processing, Waterflood and gas-lift compression facilities. South West Fateh was discovered in 1970 and is Dubai Petroleum's second largest field. Falah and Rashid fields were discovered in 1972 and 1973 respectively. The production from these fields comes from three main carbonate reservoirs. A typical formation is comprised of a sequence of heterogeneous limestones overlaid and underlaid by shale formations. Four porous and permeable oil-bearing zones (named Zone 1 to 4 in this paper) have been identified within the formation and have been targeted for development for more than 30 years.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».